Talk:Bergen Air Transport

Bergen Air Transport has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 3, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Aviation: Airlines

	Aviation portal This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
	This article is supported by the airline project.

Norway

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bergen Air Transport/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC) I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.Reply

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
I made some copy-edits for grammar and style. The prose is now reasonable but could do with improvement.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I found 4 dead links using WP:CHECKLINKS. It looks like telen.no have re-organised their site. I found 3 of the links with new URLS (refs #4, 5, 6), ~~but a site search didn't find the 4th (ref #7)[1], and there is nothing in the Internet Archive.~~
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

~~OK just one reference link to be fixed. On hold for seven days. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2010 (UTC)~~ DoneReply

Thank you for the review. I hate linkrot, which is crippling good referencing on Wikipedia, and have chosen to remove the not so important fact of the 2002 ridership figures from the article, so the article complies with WP:V. Arsenikk ^(talk) 19:34, 3 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I agree about linkrot, I am looking to use {http://www.webcitation.org/} in future. The article is fine now., so I am passing as GA. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:16, 3 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Add topic